37 réponses à ce sujet

[Linkenski]

 Personally I think they should rework as many basic dialogue-animations as possible. Also whoever they have on their mocap team, should try harder. The motion-capture animations of ME2 and ME3 suuuck. They often too out-of-context, exaggerated or overplayed. They need to rework that. As for the dialogue-animations, it's just an immersion breaker if the graphics are really next-gen and they still move around as if it's ME1, and generally there's too many unnatural-looking non-verbal stuff in conversations.

It's great considering it's still a "mechanic" and not a choreographed animation, but we know it can be done better, and I hope Bioware goes for it if they have the resources to do so.

Do you agree, and do you have other things from ME1-3 that should not be the same in ME4?

[Eamon696]

Auto-dialogue needs to go. I also agree that they need to improve the animations during conversations. It was way too often that you would see the same one over and over again.

[Funkcase]

I agree with the auto-dialogue, that needs to go.

I would also like a change in the style of the soundtrack, post ME1 the soundtrack went from very atmospheric and ambient synth style of music, to a more cliche action movie soundtrack. There are still signs of the ME1 ambient music in ME2 and 3, just not enough.

[Iakus]

The concept that our characters are not our characters.

[Oni Changas]

Linkenski wrote...

 Personally I think they should rework as many basic dialogue-animations as possible. Also whoever they have on their mocap team, should try harder. The motion-capture animations of ME2 and ME3 suuuck. They often too out-of-context, exaggerated or overplayed. They need to rework that. As for the dialogue-animations, it's just an immersion breaker if the graphics are really next-gen and they still move around as if it's ME1, and generally there's too many unnatural-looking non-verbal stuff in conversations.

It's great considering it's still a "mechanic" and not a choreographed animation, but we know it can be done better, and I hope Bioware goes for it if they have the resources to do so.

Do you agree, and do you have other things from ME1-3 that should not be the same in ME4?

Agreed.

Also, give us a huge hub area. Like a small city or most of a whole Ward. Most of all, unmasked quarians.

[Linkenski]

StreetMagic wrote...

They did go for more choreographed dialogued in ME3. "Cinematic flow" as one of the writers called it.

It sucked. It's the main reason there's autodialogue and just more of a cutscene feel at spots. Not a good thing.

I don't want a movie. Just a roleplaying game. ME2 still had it's cinematic moments, whilst still offering flexibility and stopping points for choices in more spots. If they still could pull off natural animations though, I'm all for it. For example, Thane, Jack, and Miranda are good examples (when you're talking to them on the ship). You get enough choices there and they (or the camera) move around in interesting ways. The interactions with Aria in the Omega DLC are pretty cool too (Aria in ME2 is badass as well. Whoever did the camera work there deserves a pat on the back). Aside from that one infamous glitch, of course. Heh.

edit: Javik's conversations are pretty good too.

There's actually something about how the camera shots are placed and move around in ME2 that I find to be much suprerior in general to how the cinematic feel is in ME3. The camera work feels very floaty and awkward in many cases, even in cinematic moments sometimes.

I have nothing against the cinematic flow of the dialogue itself I don't think, but I don't see why Bioware thinks it would be a crime to pause the flow everytime there needs to be a choice. Take the intro to ME3 for example. They could've done a million of things to pause the flow before Shepard spoke his first line, but because he and Anderson were walking fast it was like "no, that wouldn't make sense for them to just stop" or something. If a friend is looking at you play ME he notices when there are awkward pauses for dialogue options, but to the player it feels like time is stuck in place and they're basically just focusing on the UI rather than the characters on screen.

Besides, Bioware has shown in several instances that they can choreograph music to player input in dialogues on multiple occasions, so why not in certain places like, again, the intro of ME3? If you spam the skip button the dramatic music doesn't sync up when Shepard says "we fight or we die!", when they could've just made a choice input right before he says it, and the music would reach its climax as you picked the option.

In short: Why go all "cinematic flow" on us, when it already felt like it had a great cinematic flow before, even with the silent pauses for dialogue-option-input.

I think Bioware needs to change their perspective on "how players might percieve this and that" because with ME3 they got a lot of those estimates wrong.

[rapscallioness]

Well, hmm. I for one prefer wordier writing and characters musing on things. Preferably spontaneously so. I miss being able to click on the squaddies and hearing some prefab random line. I liked that. I miss clicking on them while on the ship and actually seeing their face with a close up. So, I say yes to musing npc's.

Uh, another thing I would like to see is better animations: running animations. Even just...moving Shep around always feels so stiff and clunky, in all the games. The npcs , too. And when they're standing there listening to you talk, or something, they move their heads in this...jerky way that bugs the hell outta me. It's very stiff and robot-y. I would like the animations to be more fluid and natural looking.

And kill the "auto-dialogue". As much as possible at any rate. I enjoyed participating in the convo.'s. It's a rare feature in games. I miss it.

[Vicious]

iakus wrote...

The concept that our characters are not our characters.

Someone who has been here as long as you knows there's no way they can satisfy some of the outlandish desires of their most hardcore fans. the line has to be drawn somewhere, and that simple fact can lead many to feel that their character is 'not theirs.' 


Anyway they need some better mo-capping and animations. See Last of Us for pretty darn good mocap. Mass Effect 3 was Shep putting his hand on someone's shoulder and then the next scene is them moving away from each other like they just embraced or something. For an example, see: Al-Jilani's paragon interrupt and too many other times to mention.


cut down the auto dialogue. As much as possible, some is inevitable of course particularly if bioware wants the character throws a joke in there - and that's fine, but people like more control and less autodialogue helps.

Modifié par Vicious, 28 novembre 2013 - 06:09 .

[LisuPL]

Linkenski wrote...

 Personally I think they should rework as many basic dialogue-animations as possible. Also whoever they have on their mocap team, should try harder. The motion-capture animations of ME2 and ME3 suuuck. They often too out-of-context, exaggerated or overplayed. They need to rework that. As for the dialogue-animations, it's just an immersion breaker if the graphics are really next-gen and they still move around as if it's ME1, and generally there's too many unnatural-looking non-verbal stuff in conversations.

It's great considering it's still a "mechanic" and not a choreographed animation, but we know it can be done better, and I hope Bioware goes for it if they have the resources to do so.

Do you agree, and do you have other things from ME1-3 that should not be the same in ME4?

I agree, that the animations of ME1-ME3 were the same basicly and became annoyingly repetitive.

Every NPC you talked to had the same narrow set of moves and gestures expressed over and over again.

ME4 should have all animations (be it combat or dialogue) reworked and in a lot wider set of gestures.

Also every NPC should be doing something, not just stadnding in 1 place for the entire game (that was an immersion breaker for me, especially in ME3 where 80% of NPCs were doing the same exact thing in the same exact spot for the entire game...)

I not asking for a complicated "Radiant AI", simply I would like NPCs to be more active, than passive.

Also I would like no cheesy tools like omni-blade introduced into the franchise... they feel... like from a cartoon and do not belong in ME in my taste.

Modifié par LisuPL, 28 novembre 2013 - 10:03 .

[Linkenski]

Also one thing that must not carry over from ME3 to ME4 if I had a say in it, is the running animations and that god-awful "equipping" animation they do at the start of combat in every mission in ME3. The way Shepard's head moves and the way he overexaggerates his motions to reach his gun... it just looks awkward and unfinished.

Modifié par Linkenski, 28 novembre 2013 - 06:17 .

[Fixers0]

Mass Effect was never about "being"  the Shepard character, It was about influencing the behavior of the tabula rasa character through various dialogue options and other actions. It's very simplistic at it's nature, but it was very effective. The obvious flipside was that Sheperd never really developed to antying  beyond the tabula rasa. The big issue with Mass Effect 3's Shepard is that while Shepard does seem to have a certain semblance of character, ( like the whole caring about earth stuff) he/she lacks the proper motivation to explain to character attributes. It's possible to have a Tabula rasa protagonist and still have character development thought that would require great effort as it will invetiably lead to countless variations as the number of possible combinations grows exponentially

[Sion1138]

Vicious wrote...

iakus wrote...

The concept that our characters are not our characters.

Someone who has been here as long as you knows there's no way they can satisfy some of the outlandish desires of their most hardcore fans. the line has to be drawn somewhere, and that simple fact can lead many to feel that their character is 'not theirs.' 

No man, it's very subtle actually. The changes that would have to be made in order for people to not feel as though their character is not theirs are minor.

Like for example, don't have the character say character defining lines through auto-dialogue. Only the obvious and indeterminate lines of dialogue may be automated.

[force_echo]

Support characters that aren't archetypes.

[GreatBlueHeron]

I didn't like it when Shep moved and stretched while talking to no-dialogue-choice-npcs. It looked like Shep wasn't paying attention. A minor complaint, but it always bothered me.

[Linkenski]

That's generally why I really didn't like the non-cinematic dialogues in ME3. It made me restless that you just had to listen to the characters go on and on about a subject when Shepard could move around freely and if you stood still he'd just stand there and stretch all the time.

ME3 definitely has thr overall amount of least engaging coversations because it's just not as immersive when the player can't choose any dialogue in conversations that arr just as long as those of ME2 in which you could choose dialogue, and the lack of cinametic camera just makes it really empty feeling.

Modifié par Linkenski, 29 novembre 2013 - 10:39 .

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

MP needs to go as it partly ruined ME3 and the Journal and quest system from ME3 needs to go.

[David7204]

iakus wrote...

The concept that our characters are not our characters.

They aren't. They never have been. They never will be.

[ShadyKat]

Holstering our weapons is a must. No reason the first two games had this, yet the third game it couldn't be done.




Like others have said, auto dialogue needs to go.
More choices for neutral players. I don't like to be goody goody, or a psychopath. Just want to be a level headed character, that does what it takes to get the job done.






Less focus on just humanity. I mean what is the point to create so many cool races, then make the entire series revolve around humans? The first game handled it well. But by ME2, humanity were the ultimate Mary Sue's of the galaxy.

[Linkenski]

David7204 wrote...

iakus wrote...

The concept that our characters are not our characters.

They aren't. They never have been. They never will be.

No but there has to be drawn a line of how far the illusion of having "our character" goes, and it was pretty much perfect in ME1 or ME2. All we're asking is that they try as much as possible to give us a player avatar that's as connected to the player as possible. Which means, not how it was in ME3.

[Nitrocuban]

New Game + should allow us to build a Shepard player char with all powers from SP and MP, maybe even bonus powers for squad mates.
Finishing the game on Insanity could unlock "Spectre Difficulty" that is close to unbeatable without NG+

[Display Name Owner]

I'd say tone down the human-centric themes. I know, the entire fanbase is human, humans are more relatable than fictional aliens, of course humanity and it's place in the galaxy has to be part of the story. I'm just saying, Bioware have actually managed to make a galaxy full of species and characters that are all very interesting so let's have more involving them. How many people's favourite characters are non-human here, for example?

So yeah, less of 'Umanity and how innovative and special they are, because pretty much everyone else is more interesting, to me anyway.

[Raizo]

I would ditch the Paragon/Renegade system all together and I would refine the the type of decisions that the ME1 - ME3 are famous for. Everything is just so Black vs White, Good vs Evil, Yes vs No, are you going to open the door and go through it or leave it closed. The Mass Effect series needs to embrace the Grey areas some more, the more morally ambiguous.